Discussion on the scientific issues of identifying “Toxic Substances”

二维码
6

By CHEN Yongru

(Environment and Resource Law Research Association of Guangdong Province Law Society)

Abstract: This article discusses the scientific controversy of the identification of “toxic substances” involved in the Crime Against Polluting Environment in local judicial practice through normative analysis, legal interpretation methods, and case empirical analysis. The research conclusions believe that the identification of “toxic substances” should be grasped from a scientific point of view. If the Crime Against Polluting Environment involves “toxic substances”, that the detected content of the corresponding toxic substances exceeds the legal national standard is generally regarded as the identification standard. The value of this kind of identification standard lies in clarifying the boundary between environmental law enforcement and environmental justice, and the boundary between crime and non-crime, and accurately cracking down on crime according to law, building a legal barrier for the construction of ecological civilization.

Key words: Crime Against Polluting Environment, toxic substances, statutory crime, environmental jurisdiction, ecological civilization rule of law

CHEN Yongru. Discussion on the scientific issues of identifying “Toxic Substances” in the field of environmental justice. BioGreen - Biodiversity Conservation and Green Development. Vol. 1, July 2023. Total Issues 45. ISSN2749-9065


20230817

Source: Evidence materials for the case 13, first instance, criminal case, (2019), Guangdong Province 1203


20230817

Source: The website of Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People’s Republic of China


20230817

A comparison between the new 2017 Environmental Interpretation and the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Cases of Environmental Pollution (Fashi [2013] No. 15, hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Interpretation).


20230817

Source: Evidence materials for the case 1203, first instance, criminal case, (2018), Guangdong Province 5281